Scott and FL House costing state 2.2 Billion
 

The Governor has flipped again in his position on expansion of Medicaid to the near poor in this state. Under the ACA and CMS the Federal government has a special program to pay for uninsured care provided by hospitals and other in state providers. This LIP money has been essential in allowing services to be available especially in underserved communities. This over 2 Billion infusion requires either that the state conform to the optional rules for providing coverage under the ACA, or the state have an alternative policy that is satisfactory to CMS for covering the poor. In 2014 Florida was given a one year extension to complete the design of a Florida program and at that time Scott indicated he supported extending coverage to more Floridians (he was also in a close election with Crist).

Now the deadline is near. The GOP controlled Florida Senate is ready to pass enabling legislation to expand coverage and get the 2.2 Billion dollars. The GOP controlled Florida House being controlled by a more extreme wing of the party and with a big push from the Kochs, is refusing to go along. The governor could have shown leadership, pushed the House, remind them that he campaigned on the expansion plan. But oh no. Instead he flip flops and is threatening to sue the Federal government to force them to give money to Florida even though Florida will not be in compliance with the long known rules for qualifying for the money. The GOP leader of the Senate seems to understand that Scott is wrong as
"The federal government has no obligation to provide LIP funding, or to work within our time-frame.”

Read details at the following links:
Gov. Rick Scott sues feds over health care money, Medicaid expansion | Tampa Bay Times


Florida Gov. Rick Scott says he'll sue to get federal money that doesn't have Obamacare*cooties

Will Florida legislators serve Floridians or the Kochs in their Medicaid expansion*fight?

Gov. Rick Scott shifts again on Medicaid expansion | PolitiFact Florida

Rick Scott has an easy way out of his Medicaid mess - The Washington Post

What does all this mean to the Average Villiger? The way it looks to me is that only poor people will feel the pain.

The underlying issue is that Obama is using his usual Chicago tactics of intimidation and demanding expansion of ObamaCare.

Does anyone reading political talk believe that we should condone government intimidation such as used by the IRS, EPA, DOJ? If so you may be happier in a place like Cuba

Personal Best Regards:

Maybe YOU'D be happier in Cuba. You'll be able to move there soon.

You clearly don't understand how politics work. Elected representatives, at all levels of Government, by and large try to get reelected. This generally means voting in a manner that represents the wished/values of their constituency. So, you are essentially saying that a good percentage of your fellow FL residents are "extreme". I personally would never be so presumptuous, and neither should you. I suspect you are a democrat and as such only your values and opinions are apparently worthwhile.

Your retort makes no sense and not a bit helpful to the conversation!

I wasn't attempting to be helpful to the so called conversation. So, Mission Accomplished!

Spoken like a caricature of the angry white old GOP voter. You can't actually believe that the average Villager believes that policies that inflict pain on poor people are good for Florida or America? And you are wrong. The hospitals that provide uncompensated care are in every county including Sumter Co. The state budget collapses without the 2.2 billion. In other states that have refused Medicaid expansion there have already been hospital closings. The dollars that the Federal government would be sending to Florida includes money that Floridians paid in Federal taxes which instead of returning here will be disbursed to other states, although it is fair to add that Florida receives far more money from Washington than it pays to Washington. Only 2 states get more back per dollar sent than Florida.

Apparently the GOP leaders of the Florida Senate should all move to Cuba and take everyone who disagrees with the most extremist positions possible. If one is not adherent to the Tea Party then one is a communist? Or is it that one is in agreement with every other developed country in the world.

So I am clear, those who feel it will be an ok thing when those Federal dollars stop, what should be the consequences for the budget and priorities for the GOP run legislature and governor? Do we just tell the hospitals to make do with less, do we close Tampa General and Shands in Central Florida? Do we institute a state income tax to cover the lost dollars? Do we raise premiums on those with private insurance so that those insurance companies can then pay more to hospitals when they get an insured patient? Or is the Right wing plan really just.. If you are poor and get sick, die. Compassionate conservatism was so George Bush, nice to see how the party has grown beyond that foolishness.

Interesting comment worthy of its own thread. Here I would only say that I do not believe that the districts as drawn in Florida result in a legislature that accurately reflects the political beliefs of its citizens especially with a primary process that results often with the most extreme candidate succeeding in being nominated due to lack of participation by the rank and file but heavy voting by motivated extremists (see Ted Yoho for example). More than half the incumbents running in the general election in 2014 for Florida house ran unopposed. Only 10% of the Florida House districts are considered competitive as of 2012, and fewer in 2014. Florida House of Representatives elections, 2014 - Ballotpedia

So to get re-elected one need not pay heed to the general voter in your district rather one has to pay careful attention to the primary voter and the special interest groups that will fund your primary campaign.

I can understand your anger toward the post that you quote. I actually thought it was a post done in either sarcasm or as bait, and not the true beliefs of the poster, but what do I know?

Anyway, regarding your post - I'm convinced that keeping the federal govt out of areas such as healthcare is the best remedy. Let the states deal with it and let the voters decide if their elected officials are doing an adequate job - if not, vote them out! One of the best run healthcare programs that I have seen in my practice, is a prescription program for low income seniors that is run and funded totally by the state that I currently live in. It is not only well managed, but provides reimbursement to the provider at levels far better than any federal program. A success story totally out of the hands of the feds.

bee-eye-en-gee-oh!

Finally an admission of purpose. Confirms many our suspicions.

I find it amusing that the states that criticize the federal government are more on the Federal dole than any of the more liberal/mainstream ones. The fact is they are propagating the welfare system to a wider extent. They just want theirs. Greed coupled with utter ignorance!

Yes, you typically excel at not being helpful ... congrats.

There's no being helpful to anything on this political forum. It's all a bunch of right wingers patting each other on the back and castigating any opposing view.

You all scream for discussion, but all you want is someone to agree with your position. That's the only discussion you seek.

I'm continually amazed at how uncaring some of you are for your fellow citizens.

Also, don't assume you know who I am...I might be you.

If that is your constituency, then the answer is yes. In other words, don't blame the representative, they are only trying to get reelected. If you want to make the claim the system is broken then I would tend to agree with you. Who fault is it that there are no term limits at the national level and that most of the eligible voters fail to vote or are easily manipulated by political advertising (i.e. fail to do their due diligence before voting)?

N:censored:W. You are in a class by yourself with no mistaking the person.

This states that the liberal mainstream are propogating the welfare system.
Two admissions in one morning.

I don't hink I can handle this unexpected catharsis of truth.

"uncaring" ... this is the usual lame liberal fallback. No one is screaming although you seem to be wailing.

Your identify is well known but I won't post it here to comply with the (ill advised) Guest rules that still prevail

Once
 

Again your lies are spread as you see fit. Texas is number one in federal money received and the rest of the top ones are all in the south. You are confused, but of course that's so typical of the right wingnuts and the gang of 6.

I think you confuse "uncaring" with opposition to hand-outs on the citizen's tax dollars. Many of us who you may feel are uncaring volunteer our time, effort, and money to support causes which help our fellow citizens through organizations that I am certain do a much better job than any federal program, dollar for dollar and otherwise.

As far as "right wingers patting each other on the back", I have noticed many more people on this forum of the conservative persuasion who sincerely try to make an effort to engage in conversation both ways, and provide thoughtful and thought provoking posts. On the other hand, I notice a majority of the liberal posts (but to be fair, not all) that only contribute in the way of one line slams and whining. This makes one wonder what the real problem might be in government if one was to look at this post as a reflection of liberals versus conservatives in congress.

Just have to look back through this thread to see the fallacy of your argument.

Looks like almost equal amounts of thoughtful posts and slams. With a slight edge to liberals in thoughtfulness, and a slight edge to conservatives in slammage.

Well I think it becomes the proverbial which came first the chicken or the egg as far as slamming goes, but I hope you aren't confusing oppositional conversation as slams. :smiley:

Was, is and always will be the issue/problem.
There is an obvious contingent here that unless you are in step with, agree with, support or unconditionally accept their premise then your position is viewed as negative or slamming or what ever the choose to call it or the person that day.

To them any discussion other than accetance is negative.

The typical response is to alway belittle or restate the opposing view as the problem.

Consistent and predictable as the sun coming up in the morning. Never anything new. Never answer a question asked directly...ever.

You will see what type of response this post will get....there will be no surprise in any of it.

In your not so unbiased opinion.

This 2.2 billion would be added directly to federal deficit. If FIC taxes on everyones retirement incomes were taxed real time to pay for this in Florida and 49 other states I suspect support might soften a little? There should be a real balanced budget so discussions such as this one would have some meaning.

When I read your post, which starts out with the obligatory liberal racist attack on "old white men" etc , and then wade my way through the public display of your dysfunction, rage and resentment I have to say I've changed my mind. I now support free psychiatric care for all, and hope you can find the help you need soon.

What are FIC taxes and if you meant FICA taxes, what does it have to do with retirement income. FICA is only on earned income and only up to an inflation adjusted amount. Almost no economists, right or left, support a balanced budget. It is a buzz word, a simple phrase, a very bad idea. Do you have a credit card, a mortgage, a car loan? Then you don't have a balanced budget and a home is not a nation where deficit spending is often essential for both security and economic growth.

A Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment Threatens Great Economic Damage — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
JSTOR: Journal of Economic Education

So back on topic, did Scott flip flop and is the state GOP right in not taking the money and insuring our poor but not poorest neighbors. And when the rural and teaching hospitals close or cut back because of non-compensated care that this money would have provided, will the GOP hatred of the ACA be enough of a reason for this political decision.

Oh boy, your argument is full of flaws. A person having debt and what the government does are two different things. The government runs a deficit each year. This means spending, including the servicing of any debt, exceeds revenues. If a consumer, even with credit card debt and a mortgage, does this for very long they will wind up bankrupt. You can have a balanced budget and still have debt. This only means you aren't taking on increasing amounts of debt. We have had a balanced budget for a couple during the Clinton administration because of the most excellent work of Gingrich and Clinton. Please do your research before posting in a public forum.

Well it is obvious you Are a republican - "doesn't affect me or my wealthy friends so what's the problem". Yikes

More of a democratic go-no-go gage based on those in office (anyone in Washington).